Recently was i also astonished about the fact that the Tulku Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche who belongs to Kagyu tradition (and Nyingma?), is a Rigdzin in the lineage of the Bon Dzogchen cycle named Zhang Zhung Nyengyud. This Bön Dzogchen cycle is the spoken word delivery tradition in Bön and one of the 3 main Dzogchen lineages in Bön.

Rinpoche got all teachings from His Holiness the 33 rd Menri Abbott, Lungtok Tenpai Nyima Rinpoche, the worldwide leader of the Bönpos.

Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche does make very much investigations about Tibetans oldest tradition, Bön.He did visit recently the old Zhang Zhung capital.

kalden yungdrung wrote:Recently was i also astonished about the fact that the Tulku Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche who belongs to Kagyu tradition (and Nyingma?), is a Rigdzin in the lineage of the Bon Dzogchen cycle named Zhang Zhung Nyengyud.

This is a mistake that was made by Samten Karmay. According to Lopon Tenzin Namdak's biography, in 1978, Norbu Rinpoche came to Dolanji and received the initation of Zhangzhung Meri as well as one text from the outer section of the Zhangzhung Nyengyud. This does not qualify for being a lineage holder of this cycle. Far from it. The teachings given in Merigar in 1989 were also about Zhangzhung Meri and other Bon works. During the visit made by Norbu RInpoche and some of his disciples in Kathmandu in Lopon Tenzin Namdak's monastery, there were only dialogue exchanges, no transmissions.

The question of lineage in Tibetan religious traditions is a simple one. Any pupil of a master can be a lineage holder. In another words, once the pupil receives a teaching from a master he or she is empowered to pass it on to another. It is the master who decides whether a given pupil isqualified to receive the teaching or not. There can be several lineage holders at the same time and therefore people talk about having a chief lineage holder implying that this pupil has a special status in the matter. The equivalent Tibetan word for this is rgyud 'dzin, 'successor'. The lineage holder of the Tibetan religious tradition is not like the one in Chinese martial arts, where a dying master may designate a talented or loyal pupil and handover a book containing secret teachings.However, in the ZZNG tradition there was a question of chig rgyud, single and unique transmission, i.e. to impart the teaching to only a single pupil, but that tradition stopped after a while, because it risked loosing the whole tradition altogether. At about the time of finishing my work, The Little Luminous Boy, two prominent figures who received the teachings of ZZNG were Menri Tridzin and Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche. The latter was a first Buddhist master who went to Menri Monastery to seek the ZZNG teachings. He is therefore a lineage holder of ZZNG teachings to his pupils whoever they are.

Understand, that these are not my words but given by Samten la 11 hours ago, central european time.

Best wishes for our individual practiceKalden Yungdrung

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

kalden yungdrung wrote: In another words, once the pupil receives a teaching from a master he or she is empowered to pass it on to another.

This not true. Samten Karmay will never acknowledge he has made a mistake. I have received a lot of teachings and I'm not empowered to pass them on to others. One needs a special transmission for that. I have even received stuff I never had time to practice, so that would qualify me to transmit them? This is stupid.

At about the time of finishing my work, The Little Luminous Boy, two prominent figures who received the teachings of ZZNG were Menri Tridzin and Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche. The latter was a first Buddhist master who went to Menri Monastery to seek the ZZNG teachings. He is therefore a lineage holder of ZZNG teachings to his pupils whoever they are.

This again is not true. To be a lineage holder of the ZZNG teachings you must have received them all. This is not the case with Norbu Rinpoche. He only received one single text of the collection. And moreover, at the time there were other lineage holders of the ZZNG who had received it from Lopon Tenzin Namdak, in full. I have read the Lopon's biography, it is clear that Norbu is not a lineage holder. Moreover, his position against Bon vinaya, termas, etc., certainly do not qualify him for being the lineage holder of a Bonpo tradition.

Understand, that these are not my words but given by Samten la

I understand, I'm not charging against you, it's just that Samten Karmay made a dramatic mistake and he is too proud to admit it.

Mutsok wrote:Moreover, his position against Bon vinaya, termas, etc., certainly do not qualify him for being the lineage holder of a Bonpo tradition.

Hello Mutsok la,

Thanks for your to the point reply. Like it.

Know that Samten La is not allways in full agreement with Bon.That is because he sees all on an academic degree or level.Some like him and others dislike him therefore.Ask myself if he does the practice of Dzogchen etc.

It is just like everywhere, that persons who give an interpretation about something like Dzogchen and do not practice it, do see it certainly different then somebody who does the practice.

I guess you do practice and are Bonpo.May i ask where you are from and where is your Bon Dharma centre?

Best wishes with your practice

In BonKalden Yungdrung

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

According to my information, ChNN recieved transmisions from Lopon Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche and became lineage holder of ShangShung Nyen Gyud. There is also a thanka with lineage tree of ShShNG and he is there at the bottom of lineage masters. This I have heard when I participated on Lopon Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche teachings in Poland in around 2003.

Gyalpo wrote:According to my information, ChNN recieved transmisions from Lopon Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche and became lineage holder of ShangShung Nyen Gyud. There is also a thanka with lineage tree of ShShNG and he is there at the bottom of lineage masters. This I have heard when I participated on Lopon Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche teachings in Poland in around 2003.

Your information is simply wrong. I have read the Lopon's biography in Tibetan (published by Triten Norbutse in Nepal) and there it is clearly stated what Norbu Rinpoche has received. This is not the whole Zhangzhung Nyengyud that he received but only one text plus the ZZ Meri initiation. This does not qualify to be a lineage-holder. I have also asked the Lopon directly about this in New York a few years ago during his last trip to the States and to make things clear and short, he has not enthroned Norbu Rinpoche as a lineage holder of the Zhangzhung Nyengyud. Lopon has given some Zhangzhung Nyengyud transmission to other buddhist masters at their request, such as Khachab Rinpoche. But, again to make things clear and short, he would never chose a buddhist to become a lineage holder of the Zhangzhung Nyengyud. He has already designated his sucessor in this lineage and this is not Norbu Rinpoche. All these rumors beings spread about Norbu Rinpoche being a lineage holder of this cycle are simply coming from people who have wrong informations.

In Tibet right now, there are other lines of transmission of the Zhangzhung Nyengyud, including, if I remember well, six or seven important lineage-holders of this cycle. They come from different lineages than the Lopon. One of them, Gyawob Rinpoche, is probably the most important. Also, Tokden Drimey Yungdrung Rinpoche was one of the most important lineage holders of the Zhangzhung Nyengyud and he reached Rainbow Body in 2002. Actually, the system of transmission of the Zhangzhung Nyengyud is more active in Tibet right now than it is in exile and in western countries. Another very important lineage holder is Lopon Trinley Nyima. He is maybe the most important of this lineage because his transmission is that of the masters from the Ya-ngal clan.

narraboth wrote:NN rinpoche gave a talk earlier this year in SOAS, London.I didn't go there, but base on my friend who was there, rinpoche made a claim:

'people said that I am a Bon teacher, actually I am not, I just researched on Bon.'(I think he has claimed this many times)

he even said that he recommand people who interest to practice Buddhism instead because nowadays Bon is basically 'buddhism's copy', the special part of Bon has mostly lost.

That what I have heard, I don't know if anyone was there and heard it too.

Hello Naraboth,

Thanks for your reply.

Bon has 3 authentic Dzogchen Lineages and i do not think there is something lost or missing because the attainment of the Rainbow Body in 1938 by Shardza Tashi Gyaltsen.Ever did read etc. his Kusum Rangshar?

So all 3 Dzogchen lineages are Bon Dzogchen and the body of Dzogchen was like allways pure because it is free from additions. That is the core of Bon Dzogchen one never can add or take out something.

But anyway am i very interested in the missing links or incompleteness regarding the Bon Dzogchen lineages.

And by the way we know also Bon Sarma which flourished about in the 17th century and only here we see some Buddhist Dzogchen masters who have had as well Bon teachers as well Buddhist Dzogchen teachers.This happened also in the Rime movement masters. Not to forget that Kyungpo Naldjor was born in a Bonpo family when i am right informed. Even Milarepa was born in a Bon family when i am well informed or had at least Bonpos in his family.

There were even Bonpos who were forced to accept the Buddhist religion but practiced in secret their native religion namely the Bon. Vairochana the big translator was also teached by Bonpos etc.I do not see here copy rights

So all in all must we keep in mind that Bon was very popular but a very forbidden tradition.Allways misused against Bonpos was , that beause Bonpos did hide their teachings, their teachings would be incomplete. Concequently they were the first born, out of the need (persecution), Tibetan Tertons.

So therefore the other traditions did thought Bon had incomplete teachings and that Bonpos did boroughed something from out of the Indian Buddhist traditions c.q. Sarma as a compensation for the so called shortcommings they would have or better said their incomplete teachings.

i guess that Sarma did import many things out of India as a compensation for the persecution of Bon.

I must agree that like the Jonang also Bon etc. were forced to accept the Prasangika Madyamaka, declared by the Gelug as the state philosophy. That was a thing which is common or taken over form the Sarma tradition.

But we have in Bon the oral traditions which was based on one master and one student etc. and here the Dzogchen teachings are very complete.

Incomplete are the Dzogchen teachings of Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche who got only a few Bon Dzogchen teachings and cannot have insight therefore into the whole Bon Dzogchen cycles of teachings.

Further do i agree he never is a Bon Dzogchen lineage holder.

Best wishes with our individual practiceKalden Yungdrung

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

I think in general he didn't mainly say it about Bon Dzogchen. He just said Bon as a religion, nowaday it's mostly a copy, which can be true. Bon might be forced to accept some idea, but I think Bon was willingly copying Prajaparamita Sutra etc to make their own texts far before Gelug time?

Again I have to say I was not in London then, so I don't know what's the exact sentence he said.

I think in general he didn't mainly say it about Bon Dzogchen. He just said Bon as a religion, nowaday it's mostly a copy, which can be true. Bon might be forced to accept some idea, but I think Bon was willingly copying Prajaparamita Sutra etc to make their own texts far before Gelug time?

Again I have to say I was not in London then, so I don't know what's the exact sentence he said.

Hello Naraboth,

Thanks for the reply.

The principles exposed in the Bönpo Prajnaparamitas Sutras are much the same as those of the Buddhist version, except that the literature dedicated to these teachings is considerably much more developed in Bön. This may sound paradoxical, in termes of history of literature, however this is exactly how things are from a literary point of view. If you have a look at the Bönpo Kanjur, you will be amazed at how many volumes are dedicated to Paramitas (about 70 volumes, varying from one edition to the other). In fact, the Paramitas sutras are known as the 'Bum (lit. 100 000) which means this is a very large corpus of texts that is collectively known as the Myriads ('Bum). It would appear that the collection became so bulky that it was detached from the Sutra section, to form its own class of teachings.

Fundamentally, the instructions contained in these works are centered around two series of eightfold themes. You have thus a series of Eight Elements (khams-brgyad) which you find throughout this literature (starting with the Root-Sutra on Jamma) and a series of egiht themes which are specific to The Arising of the Nine Suns (Nyi-ma dgu-shar) which represent another approach to these teachings. Among these themes are philosophical representations such as Self-Awareness (rang- rig pa), Eternal Space (g.yung-drung dbyings), Wisdom (ye-shes), etc. With all these instructions, the practitioner is guided through the five Paths (lam-lnga) and the ten stages (sa-bcu) through the basic pattern known as giving up (spangs) passions and realizing (rtogs) the natural state.

I guess that the natural state is not explained as a part from the Indian Buddhist Prajnaparamita.Even Nagaryuna did not mention in his emptiness approach this........

Therefore in my opinion are the Bon prajnaparamitas not copied from Indian Buddhism sources.The Shentong approach touches the Bon Prajnaparamita more then the Rangtong version / point of view.But therefore and because of other dark reasons did the Gelug forbid Shentong.

And indeed Bon did own their aspects from emptiness far before the Gelug amd the other Sarma traditions did.Their emptiness differs greatly from that of the Indian based Sarma tradition.

Hope this helps

Best wishes for our individual practice.Kalden Yungdrung

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

The root or essence of all these Prajnaparamita teachings is to unfold the quintessence of Reality (bon-nyid snying po) which correspond to the real expression of the natural state. In The Arising of the Nine Suns of Compassion (Thugs rje nyi ma dgu shar), it is said :

Thus at one time, the Revealer declared :

The principle of the Display of the Quintessence of Reality Should not be looked for outwardly because it abides in oneself.It is like the sky which embraces everything.In the purity of its (abiding) mode (endowed with an) ocean-like depth,Its errorless teachings blaze with a perfect splendor.

There is one work which summarizes nearly everything regarding the Bon Prajnaparamita Sutras. It is entitled The Ornament of the Gradual Path of Manifest Realization of the Prajnaparamita (Shes rab kyi bla na med par phyin pa mngon par rtogs pa lam gyi rim pa'i rgyan) and discusses in verse form the Eight Elements (khams-brgyad) which are central to this literary genre and practice.

If there is only one text to read/study/receive regarding the Bon Prajnaparamita, it is certainly this one. It is not always very easy but it is clear enough to provide some easy understanding and since generally the Bönpo Geshe cursus spends so much time on the Paramitas, it should not be impossible to have a qualified Geshe discuss at length and with pertinence on this subject.

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

I can only qoute what you have said: the claim that Bon Prajaparamita text is NOT copy from Buddhism, is historically strange. To convince anyone who is not a Bonpo (including Buddhists and non-Buddhists), your argue is not strong enough.Anyway, Bonpos got to believe what they believe unless they want to become Buddhists, so I will stop to challenge the authenity of Bon texts.

narraboth wrote:hi, I do repect your post, but I can't reply you as long as you did.

I can only qoute what you have said: the claim that Bon Prajaparamita text is NOT copy from Buddhism, is historically strange. To convince anyone who is not a Bonpo (including Buddhists and non-Buddhists), your argue is not strong enough.Anyway, Bonpos got to believe what they believe unless they want to become Buddhists, so I will stop to challenge the authenity of Bon texts.

Hello Naraboth,

Thanks for your reply.

Yes indeed historical seen is Bon older then Indian Buddhism.Sarma tradition owns many Bon customs that is right.Told You that the Gelug put the Prasangika as a must or standard in Tibet.Here follows that Shentong was persecuted and their monasteries closed.Yes also Bon had to follow this standard philosophy as a must like every other Tibetan tradition.So here we have a historical point which shows very painfull dictatorship caused by the Gelug.Well You should visit one time the Bon library in Dolanji, there you could read the Bon Bum or prajnaparamitas.

So you are further also convinced that Bonpos are not Buddhist.i guess you are a believer of your tradition and that is for sure your own opinion and not to forget the others, the old stamped sarma tradional adherents.

Can assure you that in our Tibetan Buddhist tradition our masters attain the Rainbow Body = Dharmakaya as a prove. Dharmakaya is the highest Body of everybody or all sentient beings and also in Buddhism the core of realisation. Therefore Bon is Buddhism and not something else dear Naraboth.Well in Nyingma they do the same and they are for sure Buddhist, because they adhere to the Buddha Shakyamuni who did not teached Dzogchen. Contradictions?

And further a Bonpo is a Buddhist because they have a Buddha named BUDDHA Tonpa Shenrab.This Buddha did indeed teach Dzogchen, but that would you even not believe.

I guess the Dalai Lama who you without doubts see as the Tibetan authority in case Tibetan affairs declared openly in 1967, that Bon belongs to the Tibetan Buddhist Traditions as the fifth tradition. But that will not mean they share the same Buddha. So here lies the so called difference.Is it not starnge that humans challenge etc.? Buddhas do not do that among themselves.

Ok you would doubt that all?Then please make contact to the Dalai Lamas office in Dharamsala and ask there for some elucidations.That could make your opinion a little bit broader or more open minded.

As long as there are persons like you and others, peace and acception among the Tibetan Traditions is a poor case.

But nevertheless do i wish you in your individual Buddhist Tibetan tradition many success with your practice.

Kalden Yungdrung

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

hi, I said I am gonna to stop to question the authenity of Bon, but after quickly reviewing your post, I got to clarify two things:

1. I am not saying Bon is later than Buddhism, I am saying Prajaparamita sutra was taught and then spreaded in India, then translated into Tibetan and Chinese, those are all with reliable historical evidence. What's the historical evidence of Bon texts' origin? It's nothing to do with who is before whom, it's about who copied whom. You don't agree that Bonpo copy Buddhist texts, fine, but please don't mess up two different things.

2. HH Dalai Lama DID NOT say Bon is a fifth school of BUDDHISM. please check Wikipedia. Quite some of your argue is again base on false thing.

narraboth wrote:hi, I said I am gonna to stop to question the authenity of Bon, but after quickly reviewing your post, I got to clarify two things:

1. I am not saying Bon is later than Buddhism, I am saying Prajaparamita sutra was taught and then spreaded in India, then translated into Tibetan and Chinese, those are all with reliable historical evidence. What's the historical evidence of Bon texts' origin? It's nothing to do with who is before whom, it's about who copied whom. You don't agree that Bonpo copy Buddhist texts, fine, but please don't mess up two different things.

2. HH Dalai Lama DID NOT say Bon is a fifth school of BUDDHISM. please check Wikipedia. Quite some of your argue is again base on false thing.

Hello Naraboth,

Well we don't want to make a mess here and i see you have here your sarma interpretation which is of the famous Indian source. Well that can be correct as well our Bon Bum collection. But therefore make a trip to the library at Menri and take a look there then you will be convinced about the copy rights about emptiness.

Dear Naraboth emptiness is a universal aspect and in Dzogchen we know for sure the different kind of emptiness as well on which all is based etc. the one who practices Dzogchen has the awareness of all including emptiness, illusions and of course karma. Therefore is Dzogchen the highest goal to archieve which is reached with the achievement of the Rainbow Body or the Dharmakaya in Bon terms the Bon sku when we may say so and of course if there are no copyrights on the Dharmakaya or Bon sku.

To declare that this emptiness MUST belong to one school of philosophy that is rediculous, or out of mind. All great Dzogchen masters know also what is karma and this is not an invention or philosophy from one school. Hindhus know also everything about karma. Karma does not belong only to the indian Buddhist tradition(s).This counts also for yoga and emptiness etc. Want to add that also compassion does not belong to one school but does belong to humanity........... Or is here Chenrezig the only symbol of Compassion?

Dalai Lama at Menri.png (345.43 KiB) Viewed 1978 times

- Well here one can see the Dalai lama 14 with the Bon hat and the Yungdrung in his right hand. - He is also sitting on the throne of His Holiness the 33rd Menri Abbot, Lungtok Tenpai Nyima Rinpoche- The Dalai Lama 14, is further sitting in exact the same posture as the Bon Buddha, called Buddha Tonpa Shenrab Miwoche.- What would be the meaning of this photo?

About the Dalai Lama 14, he sure did say Tibetan tradition, but does not deny that Bon has a Buddha.But you do because Bonpos must become Buddhist and that is a great mess and of course your respected private opinion which is not at all a general opinion.

Best wishes for your individual emancipation. Kalden Yungdrung

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD